Wiktionary:Requests for permissions/Archive 1

Add links
From Wiktionary

This page is an archive of requests for administrator or bureaucrat status. It includes all requests, whether accepted, rejected temporarily, or rejected permanently. Please put new addressed requests at the top of the page, as it is in reverse chronological order.

Successful nominations

User:Tempodivalse

Hi folks. I'm nominating myself for adminship here again. I've been editing SEWT for several months now, and have accumulated more than 900 edits, over half of which are non-automated. My last RfA failed mainly due to concerns that I wasn't completely familiar with how to format entries correctly; since then, I've created lots more articles and I think I've gotten the hang of how things work around here. I'm requesting adminship mainly in order to help the project run more smoothly, such as deleting vandalism pages and help simplify the interface. The mass vandalism spree of a few days ago suggests that we might need a few more admins, and I check the RC at least a few times throughout the day, so I can probably catch some vandalism that comes up when the other sysops aren't around. For what it's worth, I am an admin and 'crat at both the SEWQ and the English Wikinews, so I'm already familiar with how to use the tools.

Thanks for your consideration. Tempodivalse 16:50, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • If no one starts with a comment on this: Could you create an userpage, please? I don't know if this is just my opinion, but I'd like to an userpage when you want to become an admin. I opposed for no having one on an other wiki. Barras 20:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is, but the project's only bureaucrat is inactive. Maybe someone should send him an email notifying him that there's an RfA that needs closed. Tempodivalse 01:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have sent him an email letting him know. Maximillion Pegasus 01:43, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here, there is no set period of time for an RfA. RfAs have no set duration, so therefore, it could essentially last as long as a few weeks if it is a controversial RfA, to as short as a week and a half for a clear consensus RfA. Hope this helps, Razorflame 07:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Brett 15:31, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Barras

Hi there! I want to request adminship for me. I am an admin on simplewiki. and have on the German wikt the so called Sichter right (Editer). For more see my matrix on meta. Well, I don't want to become very active on this wiki, but I am often around and watch via cvn-channels the rcs of this wiki and could handle vandalism very fast. The main reason for requesting adminship here is, that I want to import page from simpleWP. The tools would be helpful, if I make a mistake and need to delete an import I made. See for the related import discussion on WT:ST. I am also identified to the wmf (dif.). If I get elected, I will always do my best and help here if needed. Thanks for your time. Barras || talk 13:09, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that'll require a steward. Pmlineditor 07:48, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And if I make a mistake when I import something (yes, I make mistakes, because I am a human), I have to wait hours to fix it. And I will not be semi or inactive. I am mostly all the day available and willing to help here. If there is something to do, I can help. I will not be very active in writting new entries, but I help with all other things. Barras || talk 16:14, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, that would require a developer to enable the "import" right here, and then a steward to implement the flag. Razorflame 19:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Therefore, the sysop tool would be much easier... Barras || talk 19:34, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Barras is trustworthy; little else matters in my opinion. –Juliancolton | Talk 18:45, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose - Yes, I agree that this user would compliment our dwindling administrator supply here on the Simple English Wiktionary, and I completely trust him. However, that note that said that he would not be very active on here does cause a little concern from me. I would rather see him continuing to make pages and expanding our Wiktionary instead of him just importing stuff here. Furthermore, if he wants the tools just to import pages here does not make much sense to me either. Either you want the tools to help our community by combatting vandalism and doing general housecleaning, or you don't get the tools at all. I see no need for the tools here if all he is going to do is import pages here from the Simple English Wikipedia. That said, he can always ask one of the three active administrators on this site to import the pages for him. Razorflame 23:18, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, my wording is a bit in the request. Not very active in comparison to simpleWP would be better. I just want to say, that I probably don't do like on simplewiki about 50 edits per day and that I probably not edit here as much as on simplewp. That's what I meant with not very active. I amke around 1,000 edits each month on wp, here it will be around 200. That's my understanding of not very active. But I am normally available all the day. The problem with the import right only is, that when I make a mistake (and yes, I make a lot of them, because I am a human) I have to wait for hours to fix my mistake. In this way, I couldn't be very productive. I want to import the page, to clean up simplewiki and help to bring good content to this wiktionary. I don't want to collect hats or something. I would be just very helpful for me to have the tools. --Barras || talk 09:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support mainly per the above support votes. I trust this user, and we could do with a few more admins around here. Tempodivalse 11:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. You just became strongly active on August 1 and requested adminship 2 days later on August 3. Even though I believe you are trustworthy, there are some things that are different here than SE WP and it takes more than just a few days to show you have a full understanding of things here. Razorflame can vouch to the truth of knowing SE WP very well but still having some "growing pains" after jumping into adminship (too?) quickly here. I'd also like to see that you have plans to continue to edit actively here. As someone else has already pointed out, there is little point in gathering another inactive admin here. · Tygrrr... 14:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Be sure, that I don't will do any admin actions (at least in the first months) when I am not 100% sure, that they are right. As I said ybove (several times, I'll import page, and if I make a mistake, it's easier for me to fix it with the admin tools. Furthermore, I pointed, that my wording in the nominations is a bit odd. It is more meant like not as active as on simplewiki. You will not elect an inactive admin. Barras || talk 14:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Show us some of that activity that you were talking about and we would be more than happy to add you onto the administration team here after a few weeks longer of activity. Keep up the good work so far! Cheers, Razorflame 05:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • I want to clean up the simplewiki by important pages from the cat and deleting them their. Here I'll take care, that they will be correct formatted. Even if this RFA fails, I go and clean up on simplewiki. There are articles which several months in this cat. I just think. that it is too bad to lose the information. Barras || talk 09:33, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Results

Congratulations, User:Barras is now an admin.

As with the last RFA, the reason for my hesitation was that despite the apparent overwhelming majority in support, most of the votes are from people who are quite new to the project. This together with Tygrrr's comments made the seeming consensus far less clear. Given Barras's specific reason for the request, however, it seems to me that this should pass.--Brett 16:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maximillion Pegasus

Hi there all! I would like to present Maximillion Pegasus to the community for the sysop flag because he has been a very active user on this site and has been a great vandalism fighter. He has also created lots of pages and we don't have very many active administrators on this site. He is one of the best candidates for the position here and I definitely trust him with the tools. Thanks, Razorflame 01:46, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: I accept the nomination. Thanks Razorflame :) Maximillion Pegasus 01:59, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support as per my nomination. Razorflame 01:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support as per Razorflame's nomination. Juliancolton 20:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Weak support.(18:32, 25 February 2009 (UTC)) Support. Maximillion Pegasus has been active in adding pages, and has done a lot of vandalism reversion on English Wikipedia. As a watcher of the IRC countervandalism channel, the candidate will be better able to handle vandalism here with the admin tools. Welcome to Simple English Wiktionary, Maximillion Pegasus! ☺Coppertwig(talk) 01:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Fine with me. :) TheAE talk 03:43, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Contribs look good; seems reasonably active on other projects and I see no reason why he/she will not be able to handle the tools. — Wenli (reply here) 06:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Absolutely not. Bad choice. That's why he's perfect for the job! :P Oh, and hi AE, RF, JC, and CT! ѕwirlвoy ₪ 05:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  7. support Good user for the job! Yotcmdr 12:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose. You have only been here for one month and have less than 500 edits. I like what I have seen so far, and I like that you have rollback rights on en:wiki, but I would like to see more from you here before feeling confident in having you as an admin here. · Tygrrr... 06:34, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Just wondering: Can this request go ahead and be closed? Maximillion Pegasus 18:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be left open for a week. Especially considering that not all active editors have commented yet. · Tygrrr... 19:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, fine with me. I was just going by how long Razorflame's request was open. Maximillion Pegasus 20:01, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really agree with that one being closed after 4 days either but what's done is done. I think that since we seem to have grown some, we need to have more consistency with RfA lengths so as to be fair to everyone. I think the standard week that other wikis use is a good length. · Tygrrr... 20:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This request has now been open for seven days. I will notify Brett about the closure of this !vote. Cheers, Razorflame 22:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Results

Congratulations, User:Maximillion Pegasus is now an admin.

The reason for my hesitation was that despite the apparent overwhelming majority in support, most of the votes are from people who are quite new to the project. This together with Tygrrr's comments made the seeming consensus far less clear. And there is also the fact that we currently have a number of active admins made it unclear to me that we needed this. Still MP does seem to be responsible and without further dissent, I don't have a good reason to delay further or reject the application.

In the future, though, I think we need to make some decisions about minimum criteria for adminship.--Brett 17:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why not make those decisions now? There is no time like the present. Razorflame 17:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Razorflame 2

As per the last time, I believe that if I were given the tools, I would be able to greatly increase the amount of help that I am able to give this site by being able to block vandals, revert vandalism, protect pages against vandalism, and delete pages that are clear vandalism. I have been steadily active on here over the past few weeks and I definitely believe that I have shown that I can be trusted with the flag. Furthermore, I do not believe that having only two active administrators on such a big Wiktionary is a very good idea. You should definitely have more than just two administrators on a site as big as this so that you can more readily deal with vandalism. I have experience in the past with reverting vandalism and I know all of the relevant policies that administrators must know in order to be able to successfully do their job. Thank you! Razorflame 02:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support I think Razorflame would be a good admin here. Shapiros10 00:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support I think Razorflame would be a good admin here. TheAE talk 23:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you both for your comments and support. Cheers, Razorflame 23:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support I think Razorflame would be a good admin here. Juliancolton 02:24, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support As the saying goes, "I think Razorflame would be a good admin here." ;-) — RyanCross (talk) 07:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Maybe he could have waited a little longer before making another request, but other than that everything is fine. Maximillion Pegasus 15:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks to you three for supporting my RfA! Thank you also for your comments! I hope to be able to use the tools for the benefit of the community! Cheers, Razorflame 15:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

  • You've been active only since January 22, and this is also your second RfA. Maybe slow down on them? After the 10 RfA at Wikipedia, it creates impression of power-hunger. Maxim | talk 01:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I made this account in December of 2007. I have made edits sporadically since then. I am slowing down after this one (if it fails, will wait a minimum of 2 months before applying again). Cheers, Razorflame 01:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    What is your opinion on this thread? Maxim | talk 01:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that we should carefully look at each one of those redirects on a case by case basis and make a decision to either keep or delete the redirect based upon whether or not they are useful, whether or not they are actually needed, and several other criterions. Discussion should be made between the users on this site to come up with the best plan to deal with them. Note that those are only for the ones that are not in the mainspace. For the ones that are in the mainspace, I would first check to see how many pages link to the redirect and if there aren't very many pages that link to the redirect, I think that it would be safe to say that it isn't really needed on here and because of the fact that redirects are discouraged on the Wiktionaries, then it would be safe to delete them. Razorflame 01:28, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you aware that the software at Wiktionary automatically redirects one to the lowercase page when searching irregardless of original case? Maxim | talk 01:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I am aware of that. In that case, those redirects, I don't see a problem with (because they are already automatically created when an entry is created. It is those redirects that aren't automatically created that would be looked at on a case-by-case basis, not the ones that are automatically created. Razorflame 01:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks pretty good other than the relatively short time active. Still thinking. However, if you get promoted, that's a good sign that I could pass if I run, so I can hardly complain. ;-) Maxim | talk 02:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you very much for the compliment! I would have no problems if you decided to run as well! You do good work for this Wiktionary; keep up the good work! Cheers, Razorflame 20:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Result

It looks like consensus has formed. Congratulations, Razorflame! You're now an admin.--Brett 18:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Coppertwig

I would like to be an administrator here.

I started at Simple English Wiktionary in November, 2006. I wrote many definitions here in July and August 2007. I helped finish the definitions of the BE850 word list, which was finished on August 2, 2007. At the same time I helped finish the first 2000 words, which were finished on the same day. I'm now slowly working on the BE1500 word list. I'm a bureaucrat on Simple English Wikiquote. People who want to know more about me might want to look at my request for adminship on English Wikipedia, which was unsuccessful with 68 supports, 44 opposes and 18 neutrals.

In the discussion on meta, someone said there were vandals with no admins around. Because of that, for the last few weeks I've looked at New changes here about once a day or sometimes more often, to look for vandalism. I will be able to help more with vandalism if I'm an administrator. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 00:12, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Very helpful, was going to nominate Coppertwig myself. Empire3131 00:41, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Great idea! Sorry it didn't occur to me to nominate you!--Brett 03:02, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    No problem! There was a long time when I wasn't very active. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 01:40, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Absolutely. Would make a fine administrator for this project. Note: I realize I am !voting from out of nowhere, but I was just updating my user page across the foundation and came across this, and I just wanted to say Coppertwig is a good candidate for adminship. Yes, I did a quick skim over his contributions, and I'm sure he will do fine. And yes, I did used to be somewhat active here. Thank you. — RyanCross (talk) 02:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Decision

Coppertwig is now an administrator.--Brett 21:04, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:TBC

Promoted to sysop by Brett at 18:36, August 8, 2008 I'd like to request administrator rights. I've been active here for a while (amassing over 800 edits), and admin rights would help me deal with specific maintenance tasks (merging page histories, deleting entries, protecting entries) and fight more effectively against vandalism attacks when the other admins aren't online. I'm also an admin on the Simple Wikipedia, so I've had some experience with handling the mop.--TBC 03:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! TBC has been promoted to admin.--Brett 23:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Brett

Promoted to bureaucrat by bureaucrat h2g2bob at 08:32, February 23, 2008

I would like to nominate Brett to be an additional bureaucrat. He seems to be the most active experienced user around here and it would be nice to not have to track down H2g2bob when we have bureaucrat tasks that need to be done (as infrequent as they may be). - Tygartl1 -talk- 19:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: I accept and appreciate the nomination. --Brett 02:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Tygartl1

Promoted to sysop by bureaucrat h2g2bob at 14:00, 27 December 2007

I'd also like to nominate Tygartl1, who has been similarly active.--Brett 21:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: Thank you, Brett. I am surprised and pleased at your nomination and I happily accept. For anyone who wants to know a little bit about me, I registered here on June 13, 2007; I have had a low level of activity here until recently. I have been an administrator Simple English Wikipedia since April so I am quite familiar with the sysop tools. I am quite dedicated to improving both of these projects and think the sysop tools would be helpful in dealing with vandalism during times that another admin is not online. For those who are interested, here is a link to my edit count. I will understand if anyone feels I have not been active long enough or do not have enough edits. With or without the extra tools, I will continue to dedicate my time and energy into improving this wiki. - Tygartl1 -talk- 02:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wenli

Promoted to sysop by bureaucrat h2g2bob at 14:00, 27 December 2007

I have been active for over a month and made over 500 edits. I would like to help out with the vandalism attacks when other admins aren't online. — Wenli (reply here) 22:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brett

Promoted to sysop by steward Jon Harald Søby at 14:47, 25 November 2006

Archer7 and Tangotango have suggested I become an admin.--Brett 18:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

H2g2bob (bureaucrat)

Promoted to bureaucrat by steward Romihaitza at 12:23, 21 February 2006

Nominating for bureaucrat rights. Thinking about it, it would be better if someone could make admins without having to go to Meta all the time. He has made a lot of good edits to the site and is the longest active admin who's not thinking of quitting. Gerard Foley 00:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be more than happy to take on the bureaucrat status, but as you may (or may not) know, I'm a student and I only have a proper internet connection during term time, which means I'll only be able to look in fairly infrequently during the holidays. I agree that we do need a bureaucrat, so If anybody else is here all the time and wants to do it, that's cool with me. However I'd love to do whatever I can, so I suppose that's a support really. --H2g2bob 11:00, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gladly support; if you need someone else, I'll volunteer if needed. (Just need to remember to come here more often! :-) ) Thanks! Flcelloguy 16:54, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I feel the same way Flcelloguy does. The only problems I could see happening would be if someone wanted to be an admin, deserved to be, but H2g2bob was not around to make him/her one. But that probably won't happen all that often, so let's go for it. --Cromwellt|talk 17:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC) P.S. I like how all of the admins support this idea. Unanimity is a good thing.[reply]

Cromwellt

Promoted to sysop by steward Romihaitza at 13:38, 19 February 2006

I have requested admin access at meta for Simple English Wiktionary. --Cromwellt|talk 21:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done! -Romihaitza 13:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

H2g2bob

Promoted to sysop by steward Romihaitza at 18:51, 16 January 2006

I've made a request for admin (sysop) access at Meta for simple.wiktionary. --H2g2bob 22:37, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done! -Romihaitza 13:28, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Flcelloguy

Promoted to sysop by steward Jean-Christophe Chazalette at 20:15, 12 January 2006

User:Flcelloguy has made a request for admin access on Meta.

Done, Flcelloguy is now admin here. Aurevilly 20:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gmcfoley

Promoted to sysop by steward Yann at 20:54, 12 December 2005

I have made a request for bureaucrat access on Meta --Gmcfoley 01:47, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sysop status granted. Yann

Unsuccessful nominations

User:Pmlinediter

Result: User Withdrew 04:58, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Pmlinediter. I've been active here for about 2 months and would like to request the admin flag. I've made about 800 edits of which 70% are non-automated. I've got some experience of formatting and think that I can help other users here. I'm active throughout the day (specially on weekends) and can help deleting pages or reverting vandalism. I believe that I can help reduce the possibly huge backlog at Special:NewPages. I'm also a sysop at SEWQ and a rollbacker at various wikis. I hope that the community has the trust in me to grant me access to the tool. Thank you for considering me. Regards, Pmlineditor  Talk 15:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose I am sorry, but I cannot, with a clear conscience, support you for adminship at this point in time. Looking back into your talk page, within the past 7 days, there have been several messages about mistakes that you make with the style of writing definitions on the Simple English Wiktionary, and I believe that an administrator should have this down pat. Furthermore, while I do believe that you would be a good administrator in the future, I just do not see quite enough activity from you. I have had to make several corrections to several of your most recent articles, and if you are making mistakes in writing articles, how will you be able to tell when it is appropriate to delete a page and when it isn't. I am sorry, but I must oppose at this point in time. Razorflame 18:48, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I'm aware of the mistakes I make (have made). However, I believe that I'm familiar with the layout guide of wikt. However, while I accept that I make formatting errors, I am not inactive here. I believe that at least this month, I've been sufficiently active (600 edits is much more than most). And imo, we do not delete a page merely since it is unformatted. And, I'd like to say that I won't go for another RfA here for at least 4 months. I don't believe that you can earn the trust of the community by trying frequently and really, I have no interest in an RfA here. Pmlineditor  Talk 04:58, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tempodivalse

Result: User withdrew Razorflame

Hi. I'm requesting admin rights here. I know I've only been here for a few weeks, but I've made about 300+ edits during that time, and created over 150 or so entries, and feel that I've gotten the hang of how things are run around here. FWIW, I'm an active sysop at simple.wikiquote and en.wikinews, so I'm familiar with how to operate the sysop buttons.

Basically, my main reasons for wishing to have administrative rights here are to be able help the project in more areas - anti vandalism, maintenance deletions, etc. Also, I frequently see mediawiki pages that need to be translated into "simple talk", but can't fix them because the mediawiki namespace is off limits to non-admins. Plus, there are only two users here who have been active in the recent past, meaning that there's a significant chance of a spambot/vandal coming through with nobody around to stop them. I check in here at least several times a day at varying times, so I could probably catch most vandalism that comes up when Brett or Tygrrr aren't online.

In any case, thanks for considering. Regardless of this RfA's result, I will continue to spend more time improving the project. Thanks for your time, Tempodivalse @en.wikinews 18:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

  • Support - Helpful user and admin on other projects, should do fine here. –Juliancolton | Talk 19:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Your edits here are greatly appreciated and I think you're well on the road towards adminship here one day. However, I don't feel I've seen enough from you that demonstrates that you 1. understand all our rules (formatting and otherwise) or 2. have a need for the tools. One minor thing that I've noticed you do is add a space between the part of speech template and the definition, something that I have had to correct on all your additions [1]. It's a simple thing, but it shows me that you haven't been around here long enough to know these basics that I would expect an admin to know. No need to jump the gun; as you know from having the mop on other sites, the tools aren't really that cool anyways :-) · Tygrrr... 18:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, Tygrrr. Thanks for your comments and suggestions. One question though, why do you feel I should demonstrate a "need" for admin bits in order to receive them? I don't think I really have a "need" for admin bits (aside from wishing to help the project in more areas), and this probably won't change, as there's nothing vital here that I need to do that requires administrator rights. I wanted to be an admin here mostly because I felt there aren't enough currently, not as much because I needed the tools. Cheers, Tempodivalse @en.wikinews 14:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My general thought is that if someone doesn't need the tools, then why do they want them? You say you want them because you don't think there are enough admins. More than half of our regular users are admins. We have very few vandalism issues or similar issues that require immediate admin attention. In what way do you think we are suffering by not having more people with access to admin tools?
Just in case it wasn't clear, I would like to clarify that demonstrating a need for the tools is extremely secondary to demonstrating complete knowledge of rules, norms, formatting etc. Even if you had a proven need for the tools, I would still be much more concerned about whether or not you have the necessary knowledge. But I do take both items into consideration when voting. · Tygrrr... 19:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
hmmm... you have a point there. I guess there's nothing really that comes up here that requires immediate attention from an admin, and this project isn't "suffering" from that or anything. However, I can remember a few instances where the QD requests category remained full for an entire day or two because there weren't any admins on hand to take care of it. Then there was another time when some disruptive usernames that were created weren't blocked for a long time because neither admin was around. IMHO having another (active) sysop would expedite the reaction time to this sort of stuff, on the rare occasion that it does happen, and would generally keep the project cleaner. That's just my view on it, anyway. Cheers, Tempodivalse @en.wikinews 00:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support The problems brought up by Tygrrr are concerning, however, this user has, in my opinion, demonstrated enough of an abillity to be an administrator here, as well as on the Simple English Wikiquote and the English Wikinews. Trust is the key thing I look for in an administrator, and I see trust here with Tempo. Cheers, Razorflame 03:16, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for the reasons that Tygrrr brought up. I do not feel comfortable giving you the mop anymore. After looking through some of your most recent edits, they show a lack of experience in the ways that we edit and format our pages here. While I believe that you will learn this as time passes, I do not feel comfortable giving you the mop because I do not think that you have the experience with editing here that is needed in order to fulfill your administrative roles adequately. This decision of mine was reached over the past 24 hours, so it was by no means rushed. You've shown us a great amount of great edits so far, with a good understanding of the basics of formatting here, but I feel more experience is needed. Sorry, Razorflame 02:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Could you provide links to some pages that you feel demonstrate your editing knowledge/ability?--Brett 20:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In what way? If you mean my knowledge of how to create dictionary entries and use Simple English, I can provide a few examples: polyglot, toy, tourist, and irregular, among others. Tempodivalse @en.wikinews 20:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It looks like I might have rushed this a little bit. I now realise I might not have the necessary understanding of how things run around here to be a sysop quite yet. Thus, I'm going to withdraw my request. Perhaps I shall try again in a few weeks or months, when I'm more familiar with how things work. Cheers, Tempodivalse @en.wikinews 02:46, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Razorflame

User withdrew Closed on January 22, 2009.

I've been active on this site for several months now and have written 19 entries and made about 110 edits so far on this site. I have combatted vandalism here in the past and I definitely believe that if I were given the tools, that I would be able to better help and serve the community by helping out when vandals strike and by making new pages and other stuff like that. I definitely think that this site is in need of administrators who are good vandal fighters and who understand the policies on this site and I definitely believe that I can provide that for this site. Thank you! Razorflame 19:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Oppose

  1. While you have made good contributions, the last edit you made before today's date (January 22), was August 18, over 5 months ago. Show recent activity for a couple weeks, and I will probably support. Regards, Maximillion Pegasus 19:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

User:DavidWS

Well, this is sort of per the english essay WP:WTHN, but also because I really think this project needs help. Two of the "active" sysops made their last contribs in the month of October, and two people can't run a site by themselves. I see a vandal creating pages that need to be deleted. No sysop is around to delete them. I've only created one entry here, and not made any edits, but the project is in danger of being closed. You can see me at the English Wikipedia at User:DavidWS. If I cannot become a sysop here (due to lack of trust) that is okay, I can still help the project by creating entries, but we also need maintenance work done. Sorry if this was a bit wordy. DavidWS 06:18, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support. Someone needs to do the work. I would run myself, but I predominantly do my work on other wikis in foreign languages and do not feel I could be terribly useful here. Additionally, at this point in time I do not think that 'too new' is a valid argument. --Neskaya 07:49, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. You haven't been here long.... ѕwirlвoy ₪ 06:21, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I absolutely will not deny that. However, I feel that the project needs more intention (hey, you're the one who wants it closed and was canvassing me to vote support). I do not want this project closed. (I have no problem with your !vote, though, I see what you mean) DavidWS 06:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I'd like to support you in a few weeks when you've got a few edits under your belt. In the meantime, I'm very willing to listen to your suggestions.--Brett 11:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, cool, thank you. Since you're the sole crat, I'll talk to you about some suggestions. DavidWS 17:09, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Welcome to Simple English Wiktionary! Thank you for being willing to help by being an administrator. I think it's good to spend some time on the project and get used to the policies here before becoming an administrator. For now, Brett and Tygrrr are active administrators. It will be better to have more administrators, but it's not a very big hurry. Coppertwig 17:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose per Brett. I would like to get to know you more before I am willing to support you. Razorflame 18:58, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decision

No consensus to promote. Maxim | talk 00:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Neskaya

Alright, 'ello there folks. I'm an admin over at en.wikt, and I came over here and saw that there're things that people can help out with, and although this project is doing pretty well it seems, no wiki person is ever an island; it seems like a few more active administrators here would be a good thing overall. I also think that because of the lack of active administrators, it is important that we have people around to deal with things like the recent encyclopedic vandalism. Thank you muchly. --Neskaya 08:58, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  • Support - "too new" is not a great argument, +sysop at en.wiki (which means trustworthy). We need more admins here to help, as there aren't many active ones.--This unsigned comment was made by User:DavidWS
No, it isn't. I'm just happening to support, it's actually quite reasonable if you ask me. I'm not disagreeing with you, again, I just support. DavidWS 14:00, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Understood.--Brett 14:21, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. I'd like to support you in a few weeks when you've got a few edits under your belt. In the meantime, I'm very willing to listen to your suggestions.--Brett 11:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Per Brett ѕwirlвoy ₪ 15:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. As I said to DavidWS, welcome, and thank you. Your experience on English Wiktionary will be helpful. I just think you need some more time here before becoming an administrator. Coppertwig 17:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose per Brett. Sorry, but I would like to get to know you more before you get the flag. Cheers, Razorflame 18:58, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decision

No consensus to promote. Maxim | talk 00:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ionas68224

Closed by administrator Brett at 16:52, 17 December 2007

With all due respect Ionas, you've just arrived. I'd say get the layout down and some more articles under your belt first. Of course, if you have other skills that haven't been displayed yet here, let us know. You might also let us know why you want to be an admin. I'd be happy to reconsider if there's some good reason.--Brett 01:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose per Brett. Less than fifty edits and less than a month editing doesn't seem like enough to be able to decide if we can trust you with admin tools. Granted, it is "no big deal," but at the same time, we shouldn't be handing out the tools willy-nilly either, IMO. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 00:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose - per Brett. Also, has caused problems on other wikis, such as SEWP, EWP, and has an indef block on meta. So, no, I don't think so. --Isis 14:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: You still have only about 50 total edits in the time you've been here, mostly in the first few days in July. Your problematic edits on other wikis make it less likely that you will be trusted on this wiki. You need to show us that you are trustworthy and mature enough to carry this responsibility. So far, you haven't. I think we can close this vote right now, since months have passed. Brett, would you do the honors? --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 01:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose The trouble caused, and blocks on, other wikis mean more editing as a proof of commitment and good faith is needed --Barliner 03:00, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Z

Closed by administrator Brett at 23:30, 23 November 2007

Although i have not made many edits on this wiki I am an administrator on the Tsonga wikipedia, edited several other simple english projects and other projects. --Z 01:24, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Still, each wiki's a little different, and I'd like to get to know you here.--Brett 19:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: You need to earn the trust of the community here before you can be an admin here. I'm glad that you have some experience elsewhere, which will hopefully help you show even more quickly and easily that you are admin material. We also want to know that you are committed to the project, which requires some time. Just keep working here and try again later. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 01:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I now have over 50 edits here but probably that's not enough. This request can now be closed and i will try again later. --Z 22:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://simple.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Requests_for_permissions/Archive_1&oldid=135464"